Thanks to Jason Delgado of The Confessing Baptist podcast for doing this special duel podcast interview with me for my first one. In this intro podcast, I am interviewed about a variety of different things such as the purpose of the podcast, what libertarianism is, and how it relates to other political terminology. Mostly, it’s just a relaxed conversation, heavily focused on an introduction to this site’s particular views regarding Christianity and our political theory. Because I am doing this one as a duel podcast with the Confessing Baptist, I do mention and cite certain particular Baptists in a special way because the context called for it.

I look forward to doing this podcast once a week. We will be getting in the very same conversations that we have on this website, we have some interviews lined up, and the next several months are dedicated to building this podcast into something more professionally produced and planned. I need some practice! But for now, it is to be relaxed, laid back, and spontaneous in its content. These particular episode pages will become show notes pages with links and reference material too.

We are currently making sure that this podcast makes it onto iTunes so be looking for that as well. As you can see in the URL, all the episodes will be easily found by the episode number. For example, this current episode is www.reformedlibertarian.com/podcast/1. The next will be /podcast/2. And so on until, by popular demand, I’m forced to retire the show. The RSS for this podcast is here. Update: The iTunes link is here.

This podcast is sort of a “trial run” to get out all of the kinks and to make sure everything is working fine. The first official podcast will be next Friday. Also, this one is quite long, and I hope to generally keep the podcast length to about 30 minutes in the future. That’s what trial runs are for though.

So consider this your announcement that The Reformed Libertarian now has a podcast. Good times my friends.

Update: One listener of the podcast pointed out that I was misleading on the extent to which the Libertarian Party is officially “libertine” or socially liberal. My response to that is basically that I wasn’t as clear about my differences with them as I should have been and I didn’t express myself well on articulating my point.

I did not mean to communicate that the LP is officially libertine or supports recreational drug use. I do still hold my opinion that the general atmosphere in the LP culture, in my experience, is skeptical of religious conservatives, cultural traditionalists, and moral dogma. With which my major point is that these things are outside of the proper scope of libertarian theory and therefore should be irrelevant to the libertarian theory.. It is likely that I will need to do a separate podcast (and blogpost) outlining my reasons as to why I am not a member of the LP. Some of it is also historical as well; their distant relationship as a “beltway libertarian” party with the “Paleo-Libertarian” Rothbardian movement (centered around the Rockwell-Rothbard Report and the Mises Institute) of the 80s and 90s has revealed much about their willingness to compromise on the most important issues (the Fed and war especially) and to dismiss the hardline Austrian libertarianism of Murray Rothbard and Ludwig von Mises in preference for “establishment friendly” Social Democrat FA Hayek. (Hayek was great on economic theory, and poor on political theory).

At any rate, I wasn’t as clear as I should have been, was somewhat misleading in the flow of my statements, and therefore issue this warning against my own words as expressed. Thanks for understanding.

I wonder if you are you familiar with the friendship between R.J. Rushdoony and Lew Rockwell and that Rushdoony was called Mr. Libertarian? I think it is a bit of a misrepresentation to say that the reason for the popularity of Theonomy is due to G. North’s marketing ability it truly is a disservice and uncharitable to color it is such light, to overlook the work of someone like Greg Bahnsen and his scriptural arguments in support of the Theonomic view while answering the question of the sources and reason for the movements growth is confusing to me. I personally came to the view through VanTil and presuppositional apologetics and a conviction by the Spirit of God in the biblical arguments of Bahnsen not because of Mr. North’s organizational abilities.